New tea party ad: It’s time for us to retire Bart Stupak

posted at 6:32 pm on April 7, 2010 by Allahpundit

Stupak to call it quits? With just a few days to go before the end of this recess, House Democrats are cautiously optimistic that they could get through it without a single retirement announcement. That said, there is still a concern that some important incumbents in districts that they are uniquely suited could call it quits. At the top of the concern list this week: Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak. The Democrat best known this year as the Democrat who delivered the winning margin of votes for the president’s health-care reform bill is said to be simply exhausted. The criticism he received — first from the left, and then from the right — has worn him and his family out. And if he had to make the decision now, he’d probably NOT run. As of this writing, a bunch of senior Democrats (many of the same ones who twisted his arm on the health care vote) are trying to talk him into running. The filing deadline in Michigan is still a month away, but veterans of that state’s politics are skeptical anyone other than Stupak can hold that district in this political climate.

He’s an obvious tea-party target: He’s vulnerable, his bloc was the deciding factor in passing a bill they despise (Stupak claims it wasn’t), and his media profile is now sufficiently high that they’ll get some derivative buzz from attacking him. But even so, for a group that’s done an admirable job staying focused on fiscal responsibility and away from contentious social issues, it’s odd to find them singling out a guy who caved on pro-life protection for his “betrayal.” He didn’t betray anyone on the larger issue of whether O-Care should be passed: He was always plain about his support for a new federal medical entitlement, provided that they added some statutory language to block funds for abortion. I get the point of making his crumble on that point a centerpiece of the campaign in a socially conservative district, but still — it’s a tiny bit of mission creep for tea partiers, albeit veiled here by omitting the key word.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I don’t know, Allah, I think it’s more like you said at first: He was the public face of possibly voting down this mostrosity, even though he likely would have all along. Anyone who pays even the slightest attention knows the name, and as you said, would get free coverage from the news channels just because of that.

I don’t see it as (at least not much of) creeping into the Social Conservative territory.

Thanks to Stupid Stupak, the taxpayers will soon be footing the bill for abortions. The pro-life/pro-choice divide in this country may be right down the middle, but a clear majority oppose federal funding of abortions. This is a winning issue for the Tea Party, not a divisive one.

Hi did bring all of this on himself. If he had stood his ground he wouldn’t be in this jam. As others had said he doesn’t have any principles. He knows it, Nancy knows it, and now the rest of the country knows it.
Looking seriously to donating to his opponent.

it’s odd to find them singling out a guy who caved on pro-life protection for his “betrayal.” He didn’t betray anyone on the larger issue of whether O-Care should be passed: He was always plain about his support for a new federal medical entitlement, provided that they added some statutory language to block funds for abortion. I get the point of making his crumble on that point a centerpiece of the campaign in a socially conservative district, but still — it’s a tiny bit of mission creep for tea partiers, albeit veiled here by omitting the key word.

The video was NOT about Abortion at all AP. He was the deciding vote. I do not give a thought to, why he did it. He sold out his principals, The Issue he sold out on is not important. He proved his lack of character, principles and values. “Why” is not important, HE SOLD US OUT.
I think the “let’s get rid of the low life character” works for me.

stu.packed \ stoo-pak.id\ v. \past tense (2010) 1: To sell one’s principles’s 2: To employ an artificial belief to gain false favor with constituents. 3:To claim a belief for constiuents only to later compromise that belief at the behest of blackmail and or currution by senior members of one’s party, paving way for termination of political career. :

Bart Stupak deserves our gratitude for personally ending the laughable myth of the “pro-life Democrat” in America. He should be honored, along with the so-called Blue Dog Coalition, whose members ended the equally laughable myth of the “fiscally conservative Democrat” by voting for the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Pro-life Democrats and fiscally conservative Democrats do not exist. They never did.

He has a D next to his name. Considering what’s at stake in this election that’s enough to make me want to see him lose. I used to think it would be better if the GOP won a bunch of seats but not actual control of either house of Congress. That way Obama wouldn’t have a GOP congress to run against like Bill Clinton did in 1996. After seeing them ram Obamacare through I no longer think we dare trust them in charge with a reduced majority. We must win enough seats to control the House if nothing else.

There’s a very narrow window of opportunity to beat back this socialist drift. It requires every one of us going to the polls and electing as many GOP candidates as possible for the next 3 election cycles.

“Bart Stupak you betrayed the constitution, you sold us out on the healthcare vote”

Now go pick up the price of your betrayal and I Hope it was something more substantial than the useless executive order Pinnochio signed. I hope he promised you speaker Peelosis’ gavel…. stooge… cause come Nov. it will be in John Boehners hands, the Tea Party Patriots will see to that.
Retire in disgrace or be beaten in even more horrible disgrace!

I agree Allah. The Tea Party must focus on fiscal conservatism because that is the binding glue that holds all conservatism together and greatly appeals to the so-called “independents”. The Federal Government was set up like a corporation, with a board and CEO,it should be run the same way. (I’m not sure what business function the judiciary would have)

I have heard that more than 10 Dems house members want to switch to the GOP but Banner has said no because most of them have strong conservative challengers for the Nov.election.Dems running scared maybe?

I agree Allah. The Tea Party must focus on fiscal conservatism because that is the binding glue that holds all conservatism together and greatly appeals to the so-called “independents”. The Federal Government was set up like a corporation, with a board and CEO,it should be run the same way. (I’m not sure what business function the judiciary would have)

Troy Rasmussen on April 7, 2010 at 8:10 PM

Perhaps so, but if there’s one issue that the Tea Party can afford to focus on that ventures beyond fiscal conservatism, it’s this. If indies were siding with the dems on this one, I could see Allah’s point. Since they aren’t, it seems like a safe way to show independants which side they really belong on.

I don’t see this as a “contentious social issue.” I see it as the ultimate cop-out. For weeks he grand stands, saying he had no flexibility on federally funded baby killing, then he folded up like a cheap suit, after slow dancing in the oval office with The One.

He is an embarrassment to the state of Michigan….. and they have enough problems already.

He didn’t betray anyone on the larger issue of whether O-Care should be passed: He was always plain about his support for a new federal medical entitlement, provided that they added some statutory language to block funds for abortion.

Really don’t care why he voted for it – the fact is he did – and carried a block of “moderates” with him. His theatrics alone are cause enough to target this A-Hole.

AP, you understate his media profile too. It isn’t “sufficiently high” it’s in friggin’ orbit. Even your Grandma knows who Bart is now.

The criticism he received — first from the left, and then from the right — has worn him and his family out.

Shouldn’t’ve sold out, Bart.

Anyways, I don’t think the tea party’s being off-message at all. As you pointed out, his bloc delivered the deciding factor, and his will-he-or-won’t he until the last minute kept everyone guessing on whether or not it would pass.